[CAUT] Mitutoyo gauge

[Jim Busby]

Ron,

I shoulda known you'd have something like this! <G>

To me this whole thing was precipitated by the "debate" as to whether firmer front rail punchings make for "better" regulation. My silly test simply confirmed what I thought; that there really is a difference in the compressibility of punchings. I've actually learned a bit from it. As usual though, at the end I've got more questions than answers.

Regards,
Jim

p.s. Was this thread original? (or #47)

 

-----Original Message-----
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Ron Nossaman
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 4:06 PM
To: caut at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Mitutoyo gauge


Punching squeezers,
I bought a low tech durometer at an estate sale cheap, a few years ago. 
Keen little toy, intended for rubber originally, but it works fine for felt too. It's a standard Shore A scale. Here's a photo of the durometer, and a sampling of punchings, for your edification.

The punching on the left is from what's probably a 40+ year old bag of old tuner leftovers. It's thinner than the others, but reads the same when two are stacked. It reads the same as the Crescendo punchings. The dark green Pianotek punching is older, and a bit firmer than the new Pianotech punching of the lighter color. Same stock number. The Yamaha punching should be pretty close to current stock. The Schaff punching on the right is what they sold forever, though I don't know if it's what they sell now.

There you go, for whatever...

Yea, I know, I spelled Crescendo wrong. <G> Ron N